DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 
DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
TIMOTEO UPIA-FRIAS, 
Defendant. 
) 
) 
) 
 
) 
 
) 
Case No. 3:21-cr-0013 
) 
) 
)  
) 
) 
 
ORDER 
 
BEFORE THE COURT is the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge 
recommending that the Court accept Timoteo Upia-Frias’ (“Upia-Frias”) plea of guilty (ECF 
No. 42) to Count One of the Indictment, charging Reentry of a Removed Alien, in violation of 
8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). For the reasons stated below, the Court will adopt the Report 
and Recommendation.  
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, “[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy [of 
the Report and Recommendation], any party may serve and file written objections to such 
proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court. A judge of the court 
shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed 
findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Here, 
neither party filed an objection within fourteen days of service of the Report and 
Recommendation. Therefore, “the scope of [the Court’s] review is far more limited and is 
conducted under the far more deferential standard of ‘plain error’.” Tice v. Wilson, 425 F. 
Supp. 2d 676, 680 (W.D. Pa. 2006) aff’d, 276 Fed. App’x 125 (3d Cir. 2008); see Henderson v. 
Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (“While . . . [28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)] may not require, 
in the absence of objections, the district court to review the magistrate’s report before 
accepting it, we believe that the better practice is for the district judge to afford some level 
of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report.”).  
Case: 3:21-cr-00013-RAM-RM   Document #: 43   Filed: 11/01/21   Page 1 of 2
United States v. Upia-Frias 
Case No. 3:21-cr-0013 
Order 
Page 2 of 2 
 
After carefully reviewing the record and the Report and Recommendation for plain 
error, the Court does not find plain error in any of the magistrate judge’s factual and legal 
findings. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the 
Court finds that Defendant Upia-Frias entered his guilty plea knowingly and voluntarily, and 
that there was a factual basis for the plea. The Court, therefore, will adopt the Report and 
Recommendation and find Upia-Frias guilty as to Count One of the Indictment. 
Accordingly, it is hereby 
 
ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 42) is ADOPTED; it is 
further 
ORDERED that Defendant Timoteo Upia-Frias’ plea of guilty as to Count One of the 
Indictment is ACCEPTED, and Defendant Upia-Frias is adjudged GUILTY on that count; it is 
further 
 
ORDERED that, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(c)(1)(A), the U.S. Probation Office shall 
conduct a presentence investigation for the preparation of a presentence report; it is further 
 
ORDERED that the U.S. Probation Office shall disclose the preliminary presentence 
report to the parties no later than January 13, 2022; it is further   
ORDERED that the parties shall submit any objections or corrections to the 
preliminary presentence report to the U.S. Probation Office no later than January 27, 2022; 
it is further   
ORDERED that the U.S. Probation Office shall disclose the final presentence report to 
the parties and the Court no later than February 10, 2022; it is further 
ORDERED that the parties shall file their sentencing memoranda no later than 
February 24, 2022; and it is further   
 
ORDERED that a sentencing hearing shall be held on Thursday, March 3, 2022, at 9:30 
A.M. in St. Thomas Courtroom No. 1 before Judge Robert A. Molloy.       
 
 
Date: November 1, 2021 
 
/s/_Robert A. Molloy  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
ROBERT A. MOLLOY 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Judge 
Case: 3:21-cr-00013-RAM-RM   Document #: 43   Filed: 11/01/21   Page 2 of 2